Wikipedian filing request:
Other Wikipedians this pertains to:
Wikipedia pages this pertains to:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)
What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.
What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
A.J.A. will not allow any neutral additions to the Kepler College article. I initially had language that was not exactly neutral, so I changed it and made it neutral, but A.J.A. still deletes it, allowing only the one negative point of view. It appears like censorship. There is a header called 'criticism and commentary', which appears to be a place to add opinions and quotes from sources that have commented on Kepler. But A.J.A. will allow NO further additions to the 'criticism and commentary'. I tried to create a header for the college's history and mission, which contained just facts, no additional commentary or promotion. Under Criticism and Controversy I quoted the President of the College, but that was too long and was deleted. Then I quoted just a small section of it and that was deleted, too. I was nice in the beginning, asking for further info, but I was treated rudely by A.J.A. and now I'm angry. Additionally, I am not allowed to create another article covering the same issues, so the only article on Kepler College is outrageously negative and not entirely truthful. Censorship is simply unacceptable and I expect you to control your over-zealous editor, A.J.A. and ensure that his/her agenda and prejudices are not used to keep legitimate information and ideas off of Wikipedia.
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:
Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
Case Status: closed
Advocate Status:
Wikipedian filing request:
Other Wikipedians this pertains to:
Wikipedia pages this pertains to:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)
What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.
What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
A.J.A. will not allow any neutral additions to the Kepler College article. I initially had language that was not exactly neutral, so I changed it and made it neutral, but A.J.A. still deletes it, allowing only the one negative point of view. It appears like censorship. There is a header called 'criticism and commentary', which appears to be a place to add opinions and quotes from sources that have commented on Kepler. But A.J.A. will allow NO further additions to the 'criticism and commentary'. I tried to create a header for the college's history and mission, which contained just facts, no additional commentary or promotion. Under Criticism and Controversy I quoted the President of the College, but that was too long and was deleted. Then I quoted just a small section of it and that was deleted, too. I was nice in the beginning, asking for further info, but I was treated rudely by A.J.A. and now I'm angry. Additionally, I am not allowed to create another article covering the same issues, so the only article on Kepler College is outrageously negative and not entirely truthful. Censorship is simply unacceptable and I expect you to control your over-zealous editor, A.J.A. and ensure that his/her agenda and prejudices are not used to keep legitimate information and ideas off of Wikipedia.
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:
Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
Case Status: closed
Advocate Status: